Personally, although I think the Wee Wee should be impeached for dozens of other screw-ups, allowing our military to take out terrorists who are in need of a good killing is one of few things the meat head has done right.
Posted on 10/23/2011 4:29:55 AM PDT by maddog55
It's back once again to the point of "who is working for who" in this country.
Perhaps our checks and balances are a bit broken these days?
It's like Judge Dredd the Cop, the judge, and the executioner all in one.
All of this can be easily resolved if the judge and Mark Levin got together to have a public debate over the 14th Amendment. If you take Levin’s reading of the text, this is a non issue. It would be a most interesting discussion because I believe both have the intellectual skills to make this a must see.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMGmukyJh3k
Obama believes the President’s authority is absolute.
He scoffs at the Legislative and Judiciary Branches over multiple issues.
Giving a man like this the authority to order the asassination of a US citizen, with no oversight, is the height of insanity.
Murder? A high crime? Vince Foster agrees with you !!!
“Giving a man like this the authority to order the assassination of a US citizen, with no oversight, is the height of insanity.”
Intelligence operations are overseen by the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee. An important operation, especially one involving a US citizen (should) be brought before the committee. I’m assuming that’s the present procedure and it was followed. If the committee gave the go-ahead then that’s all Obama needs for cover on the present case. (More on the legality below.) Now, if Obama’s agencies are running with no oversight whatsoever, then yes, the situation needs to be addressed.
Recall Joe Biden wanted to put Bush on trial. Biden called it a show trial, I kid-you-not. I think it would be a terrible precedent to set that presidents pursued their recent predecessors for political reasons. We’d never get a conservative agenda enacted. Nobody would even try. Besides presidents are supposed to pursue their agenda. That’s what we elect them to do. Now, if Obama’s committed fraud or theft or clearly violated laws that aren’t political (wide-open field there) then let’s prosecute.
Voters should be the ones who punish presidents for pursuing an unacceptable agenda.
Having said this, the president has a broad range of powers. One of them is to protect the Constitution and the people from enemies foreign and domestic. There are ample examples where actions taken by US presidents killed American citizens who had gone over to the other side. We need to bear mind that the presidency may soon be again in the hands of a mature, American adult and we wouldn’t want to tie that future president’s hands by taking rash actions based on how much we despise the Child-in-Chief.
I agree that briefing and asking for consent from the bipartisan Intelligence group would be acceptable, I do not see any evidence that Obama did such a thing.
Boooooooooooooooooooooringggggggg!
Again.
There are VERY MANY reasons to impeach this jerk.
Killing an avowed enemy—by whatever means—is not one of them.
I agree with the judge, but the Republicans that we have worked so hard to put into their chairs are so weeniefied that they end up going on TV and praising the morons who are destroying parks around the city.
I am fed up with all of them. I got involved in politics to make a difference in our leadership. I felt I couldn’t complain if I didn’t do my part. Now? Now I feel like what is the point. Impeachment should have happened over the Libyan war that went on without Congressional approval. And MANY MORE REASONS. Issa is the only who is giving a crap or even speaking out against Fast and Furious. What the hell are they there for??
I’m afraid like it’s game over. Republicans look the other way so that Dems will when they are in power. It’s a big game and we are the dupes.
In the future, if Obama wants to assassinates another American citizen, he should first appoint an anarcho-syndicalist commune. The members would take turns as a sort of an executive officer for the week. But all the decisions of that officer have to be ratified at a special bi-weekly meeting, by a simple majority in the case of purely internal affairs, but by a 2/3 majority in the case of more major issues
Wow. Just wow.
You have seen how many times and how much effort that “white Christian male are terrorists” crap that has been slung out of the DHS.
You had better hope that you never end up on some maniac President’s list of “avowed enemies.”
Seriously, that “first they came for the jews and I was not a jew...” poem has had a more fitting description of your post.
He scoffs at the Legislative and Judiciary Branches over multiple issues.
Just because YOU agree with Obama's definition of enemy (this time) does not mean you will agree with his definition next time.
Yup, gotta agree with that. This wasn't just an avowed enemy, this was a publicly self-identified traitor who was actively engaged in war with his "own country", that fact is self-evident. This was a legitimate act of war.
If Clinton didn't get indicted after Waco, Obama won't for snuffing this muslim POS.
How about David Koresh?
POS govt burned children alive and Willard and Weebeast are still walking free.
However, remember when Bill Clinton was impeached? There were some very serious issues boiling over, but the Republicans chose to impeach over the issue of perjury.
BFD!
In the case of Barry Soetero, the Republicans will do nothing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.